# Congress introduces a 775% increase on Pipe Tobaco



## Alpedhuez55

I know not everyone posts on the call to action forum, so I am posting a link to my other post here. Congress has introduced the *Tobacco Tax Parity Act of 2010* was introduced on January 13, 2010 and would raise the tax on pipe tobacco 775% from $2.8311 to $24.78 per pound. I knew this was coming when you heard about all the RYO people re-branding their tobacco as pipe tobacco to get around tax.

You can see the other post here with a link to email your congressmen:

http://www.cigarforums.net/forums/v...increas-pipe-tobaco-proposed.html#post2791511


----------



## hillikus

Disgusting...

Count me in on the email roster.

-H


----------



## Davetopay

Please see my earlier statements about stocking up for the coming rapin....taxing.


----------



## Jack Straw

****.


----------



## Arctic Fire

omg thats insane... ill have to up my TAD.


----------



## DarHin

Jack Straw said:


> ****.


^^^What he said, and might I add, $#%^#!:nono:


----------



## ghe-cl

If you really want to exert some influence, you need to take action on your own. Members of Congress pay virtually no attention to e-mails and other correspondence that is just a copy of something from a lobbying organization or group. Do it right. Look at the Web site for the House Appropriations Committee (where this bill has been referred) and see if your congressman is a member of the committee. If so, write a letter in your own words expressing your own opinions about the proposal. If you don't have a congress member on the committee, write to your own congressman about your concerns over the proposal. You might also be interested to know that a similar proposal was made last year in the Senate and didn't get far.


----------



## Jack Straw

Looked it up, it is assigned to the ways and means committee, it would seem, and it only has one cosponsor, who is a member of that committee (but not the chair). That is a very good sign for us.


----------



## ghe-cl

Jack Straw - Thanks. I don't know why I wrote Appropriations. Of course it's Ways and Means. It's taxes. I just wasn't thinking. The sponsors are Steve Cohen (Dem., TN), and Lloyd Doggett (Dem., TX).


----------



## Jack Straw

According to my sources the sponsor of the bill does not have a lot of sway in the ways and means committee.


----------



## Royale Duke

Why does congress have mess with everything I love? Guns, Tobacco...yeesh it will never end.:sad:


----------



## GuitarDan

resistance is futile...


----------



## Theophilus

The only things that the government can do right are killing people and breaking things. Everything else that they do they screw up.


----------



## Mante

Hey people, be happy our Prime Minister in Australia is a dick & your politicians dont hear him. Our tobacco tax is $146.33 per pound. That is on every type of tobacco.


----------



## rlaliberty

Bob Tate article on pipesmagazine.com Proposed Federal Tax Increase on Pipe Tobacco (Bill H.R. 4439) | With Pipe and Pen


----------



## stoked

Too bad we can't impose tax on something politicians are addicted to - like being a-holes.

Right now I order from the US because $3-4 of your tobacco would cost $20-25 here (Canada). My last order (that got tagged by customs canada) was about $70 worth of baccy - customs put the Canadian value at $684 on the customs form. I had to pay $50. Still a huge savings, but who knows if things get crazy there what we will all do.


----------



## rlaliberty

And I just put in next month's baccy purchase a week early. Right at the free shipping mark.


----------



## PinkFloydFan

Ok fellas... 
Good morning...

Does this mean fill my cellar NOW? LOL

Vin


----------



## shuckins

i just placed a larger than normal order. tax or no tax,at least i'll be smoking!


----------



## Bear Graves

Sadly, neither the US reps in my present state, nor the reps in my long term home of AZ occupy a spot on Ways and Means (pity, I used to be the Area coordinator for the (now) minority party in AZ's 18th legislative District, and as I like to quip, "I still have pics of John McCain and I cleaning out a part of his backyard for a BBQ fund-raiser, to prove it". Nonetheless, I sent the following to the chairman on the Ways and Means (Chuck Rangel, God help us), as well as those I know in the present house. 

"Many times in our country's history, even the most reasonable of men and women have become swept up in a societal and legislative tsunami. Be it the hysteria of the McCarthy era, or the well intended naivety of the Volstead Act, the firebrands genuinely believed that their aim was to improve the lot of a group of individuals, or the country, whether those affected could see the benefit or not. And, for at least a short while, moderates were placed in the horrid position where they believed a "Nay" vote would spell doom for their political careers. After all, what kind of REAL American could possibly be against the evils of liquor, or in favor of Communists eventually taking over the government? 

Eventually enough courageous legislators banded together, said "It stops here", and voted based upon reason and the reality of the situation, not the pressures of fashion.

To place any additional increase in taxation on this most benign form of tobacco usage, much less than the bewildering 775% increase proposed in H.R. 4439, an increase that would effectively toll the death-knell for both a cottage industry, as well as this time honored, and respected means of seeking solace and quiet enjoyment.

Respectfully, I submit that it is well past time to say "Enough!", and ask that you oppose H.R 4439.

Dr. Ronald "Bear" Graves


----------



## KINGLISH

So very Disgusting!!


----------



## bkeske

GuitarDan said:


> resistance is futile...


No, it is not futile, it is our right to resist. It is that attitude that has allowed Congress to govern beyond their mandated Constitutional powers for many many years. heck, as I always say, 90%+ of the Bills that come before Congress are unconstitutional. All, wrongly misinterpreted, under the 'general welfare' clause. They (Congress) are out of control, and have been for decades now.

Throw these bums out.

Bear; nicely stated.


----------



## indigosmoke

Way to go Bear! Well put indeed. Now let's see those John McCain pics!


----------



## thewileyman

Just wrote to my Representative, and also to my Senators for good measure.


----------



## unsafegraphics

stoked said:


> Too bad we can't impose tax on something politicians are addicted to - like being a-holes.


:rofl::rofl:


----------



## MarkC

deleted post; sorry for the inconvenience!


----------



## Mad Hatter

Freedom of Speech vs. The Corporate Lobby? Hahaha..................... outlook not good


----------



## stoked

unsafegraphics said:


> :rofl::rofl:


I'm glad someone got it.


----------



## bkeske

Mad Hatter said:


> Freedom of Speech vs. The Corporate Lobby? Hahaha..................... outlook not good


Corporate Lobby? Which ones?

Here is a related article I found from March of last year:

*Federal tobacco tax inequitable*
A federal tax increase in tobacco products to fund S-CHIP unjustly burdens low-income smokers.

Published: 03/10/2009

The cost of lighting up is soon going to be anything but light. On Feb. 4, *President Barack Obama signed a law that will increase the tax on tobacco products in order to fund the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP),* which makes health care more affordable for children from low-income families. While the proceeds from these taxes would support an important program, placing the burden of paying for it solely on smokers is both unfair and inequitable.


 The federal tax increase affects all tobacco products, *but loose tobacco is facing the most significant change* - from a $1.10 per pound tax to a whopping $24.78 per pound tax......

Federal tobacco tax inequitable | mndaily.com - Serving the University of Minnesota Community Since 1900

Exactly what corporate lobbies are petitioning to fund Governmental programs such as SCHIP? Seems to me this is primarily a very select 'sin tax' to raise funds for another Government program. Interesting that it was the above that finally got me to give up my 2 pack per day cigarette habit, (because of their higher cost), for the pipe, in addition to knowing it would also be better for my health overall.

Silly thing is, if this results in folks giving up their 'sinful tobacco' use, the Government will have to finally tax everyone across the board instead of being so selective in penalizing smokers who have no direct negative effects on programs as SCHP they are finding ways to fund.

But, you are correct, from the look Congress lately (and in the past), free speech means little to these politicians who desire to ram Government programs down our throats even following very vocal free speech in opposition. That said, this free speech opposition seems to have been taken a bit more seriously following last weeks election in Massachusetts. Free speech is important, but voting even more so. Thus, I vote accordingly to my desire for freedom from an out of control Federal Government.


----------



## ejgarnut

I usually order my wife's tobacco 6 cans at a time. Each can is 10.6 ounces or so. Before our wonderful tax increase, it costed about $85, shipped. After the tax increase it totaled up about $210. Thats about $125 of extra tax. 

Where was everyone when the government started taxing cigarettes & MYO tobacco??? I guess everyone thought the government would stop there & not tax cigars & pipe tobacco any more.


----------



## Mad Hatter

bkeske said:


> Corporate Lobby? Which ones?
> 
> Here is a related article I found from March of last year:
> 
> *Federal tobacco tax inequitable*
> A federal tax increase in tobacco products to fund S-CHIP unjustly burdens low-income smokers.
> 
> Published: 03/10/2009
> 
> The cost of lighting up is soon going to be anything but light. On Feb. 4, *President Barack Obama signed a law that will increase the tax on tobacco products in order to fund the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP),* which makes health care more affordable for children from low-income families. While the proceeds from these taxes would support an important program, placing the burden of paying for it solely on smokers is both unfair and inequitable.
> 
> The federal tax increase affects all tobacco products, *but loose tobacco is facing the most significant change* - from a $1.10 per pound tax to a whopping $24.78 per pound tax......
> 
> Federal tobacco tax inequitable | mndaily.com - Serving the University of Minnesota Community Since 1900
> 
> Exactly what corporate lobbies are petitioning to fund Governmental programs such as SCHIP? Seems to me this is primarily a very select 'sin tax' to raise funds for another Government program. Interesting that it was the above that finally got me to give up my 2 pack per day cigarette habit, (because of their higher cost), for the pipe, in addition to knowing it would also be better for my health overall.
> 
> Silly thing is, if this results in folks giving up their 'sinful tobacco' use, the Government will have to finally tax everyone across the board instead of being so selective in penalizing smokers who have no direct negative effects on programs as SCHP they are finding ways to fund.
> 
> But, you are correct, from the look Congress lately (and in the past), free speech means little to these politicians who desire to ram Government programs down our throats even following very vocal free speech in opposition. That said, this free speech opposition seems to have been taken a bit more seriously following last weeks election in Massachusetts. Free speech is important, but voting even more so. Thus, I vote accordingly to my desire for freedom from an out of control Federal Government.


Gee, I don't know. Do I really need to spell that out. Who stands to benefit from more people living longer lives and having a lower incidence of terminal illness at earlier ages? Maybe the same guys who have new findings reported daily and nightly on every news broadcast in America and have more televisions adds showing daily for their products than anyone else. Maybe the same people who have sales reps out the wazoo pushing their products in every doctors office around the nation.

Yes Massachusettes is a shining beacon for freedom of speech. I hate to break the news to you but that same shit happened across the country at the last mid-term elections only the shoe was on the other foot at that time. As a matter of fact that's how the current majority got to be a majority. Is this Representative of the people's will going to stand up for our rights as smokers and lead a rebellion in Congress? I don't wanna ruin your faith in our political system but he's just another guy who will stuff his pockets full of lobby money.

Anyway, like the other guy said, "First they came for the cigarette smokers, but I didn't speak up because I was not a cigarette smoker....................."

United we stand, divided we fall and all that stuff.


----------



## bkeske

Mad Hatter said:


> I don't wanna ruin your faith in our political system but he's just another guy who will stuff his pockets full of lobby money.


I'm not sure what gave you that idea. I have little to no faith in how our current political system is being run, nor its direction. Finding it justifiable to cram sin taxes down a small minority of selective tax payers in order to fund a much larger program is proof of my lack of faith it the current direction. Heck, I don't even think programs as SCHIP should be a Federal responsibility at all per the Constitution, let alone believe smokers should carry the weight to fund it. But that is for another discussion.

But, lobbyists are not the real problem, the Congresspersons that feed at their trough are, and the number of lobbyists 'running' D.C. are worse today (and the past year) than in any other time I can remember. Unfortunately we do not elect lobbyists, we elect politicians. Vote wisely. I doubt lobbyists are the real problem in this proposal, or the last tobacco increase. The real problem IMO is what these Congresspersons believe is their power to regulate and control in the first place. I just don't see 90% of what they pass as a Bill/law under Article I, section 8.


----------



## bkeske

"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare,
and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare,
they may take the care of religion into their own hands;
they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish
and pay them out of their public treasury;
they may take into their own hands the education of children,
establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union;
they may assume the provision of the poor;
they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads;
in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation
down to the most minute object of police,
would be thrown under the power of Congress.... Were the power
of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for,
it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature
of the limited Government established by the people of America." - James Madison


----------



## commonsenseman

This crap is just another example of why we need term limits.


----------



## MarkC

I hate to break this to you people, but pipe smokers are a very small minority in this country. Smokers all together are a minority. The general populace is largely made up of people who not only don't smoke, but think smoking is inherently evil. Don't blame the system. It's not the lobbyists, or the congressmen. It's that guy standing next to you in line at the grocery store. The only solution I see to this is the same one that worked with alcohol. Go ahead and outlaw the stuff, then when the black market takes over and the corpses are piling up from gang wars, then maybe sanity will return. Let's see...that took what, thirteen years? Um...multiply that by fifty-two weeks at a tin a week....


----------



## bkeske

So, we should just give in to being taxed unfairly?

What will the argument be when Big Macs are taxed higher because they are a public health issue? Should we only tax smokers that eat Big Macs? Or should we only tax the overweight folks that purchase Big Macs. Or should we tax all Big Mack eaters. *Or, is it the rightful power of Congress to tax us in this way at all?* _That _is the point for me, and should be for all of us, smokers and non-smokers alike.

It _is_ the Federal Government, it _is_ the lobbyists, and it _is_ 'us' we are talking about here. Just because many folks do not like smoking does not in and of itself give anyone the right to tax us randomly for it. What is the point? To stop us from smoking? Or to pay for unrelated Government programs? You can't have both.


----------



## bkeske




----------



## Mad Hatter

MarkC said:


> I hate to break this to you people, but pipe smokers are a very small minority in this country. Smokers all together are a minority. The general populace is largely made up of people who not only don't smoke, but think smoking is inherently evil. Don't blame the system. It's not the lobbyists, or the congressmen. It's that guy standing next to you in line at the grocery store. ....


Very good point and true to a great degree Mark


----------



## stoked

bkeske said:


> What is the point? To stop us from smoking? Or to pay for unrelated Government programs? You can't have both.


This is what I find annoying. If you're not gonna make it illegal then just shut the hell up. I live in Canada where we're already taxed up the wazoo on tobacco (price is 4-5X US prices -all tax). I already made my peace with tax but when I'm doing something that is not illegal and looked at by my peers as a criminal for using tobacco it gets my dander up. Also, make sure my taxes on tobacco purchases go to health care (not likely). Stop these BS anti-smoking campaigns and just outlaw the stuff or leave me in peace to kill myself slowly (ha ha) - it's my prerogative.


----------



## drastic_quench

They should just go on already and legalized marijuana and tax it reasonably. It's the economic fix that no politician will touch because they want to be re-elected. I hope California does this at the state level and shows the rest of the US how it's done.


----------



## Alpedhuez55

MarkC said:


> I hate to break this to you people, but pipe smokers are a very small minority in this country. Smokers all together are a minority. The general populace is largely made up of people who not only don't smoke, but think smoking is inherently evil. Don't blame the system. It's not the lobbyists, or the congressmen. It's that guy standing next to you in line at the grocery store. The only solution I see to this is the same one that worked with alcohol. Go ahead and outlaw the stuff, then when the black market takes over and the corpses are piling up from gang wars, then maybe sanity will return. Let's see...that took what, thirteen years? Um...multiply that by fifty-two weeks at a tin a week....


I disagree. Most people do not look at it as evil. Most non smokers could care less, especially in regards to pipe tobacco.

You have a small minority, mostly on the left who want tax it to the point of it being banned. THey have undue influence over a handfull of congressmen just like Big Tobacco does on the other side. THe problem at the moment is we have a group of borderline Socialists running the House, Senate and White House. So the vocal minority is able to push for this type of bill.


----------



## Brinson

I don't think most of the anti-smokers are on the left. I think its pretty evenly distributed. Most of them are, in fact, the parental type who view smoking as some kind of threat to their children. They tend to be older, middle aged, and that group tends to be conservative.

Just my opinion, though. Most of the anti-smokers I've met were diehard republicans. As someone whose been to democrat and republican party meetings in my area, there were people both drinking and smoking at the democrat meeting, but no such thing at the republican meeting. From the conversation I had with my government teacher, who was a republican, this is very common. The abstinence from "sinful" items is a trend in conservatives more than liberals, however, liberals are more likely to believe in enforcement for the common good, so you have it on both sides, but I think if its more on one side, its more conservative.


----------



## bkeske

Don't mix-up Republican and conservative. The two don't necessarily agree with one another.

A true conservative IMO supports freedom for its citizens to make choices for themselves. This (smoking rights) is an issue a 'true conservative' should support.

I've been all over the spectrum, including a 'Dead head' hippy in the early to mid-seventies. What we all wanted back then is the freedom to do as we wished, live as we wished, and not be beaten down by 'the man'. :mrgreen:

Funny how most all the other folks I know (old fellow hippies) from that era are mostly now in full support of handing over power to the Government to tell us how to live. That makes no sense to me, that is what we 'fought' against, and I finally started realizing it in the early-mid eighties, while also realizing the Constitution_ as written_ fully supported this freedom. Since then, I've been a staunch _conservative_ 'Dead head' hippy :hippie: :mrgreen: Well, I cut off my pony tail back in the early nineties.....finally :laugh:


----------



## smelvis

Boy this thread gives me a headache, not you guy's you are all well spoken an make great points that I agree with mostly.

My simple brain just say's don't tax any one group or product more than any other! The only fair way to go!

But then I also think you could cut Government in half and actually make them work and we wouldn't have a problem.

Okay all yours again.

Dave :hippie:


----------



## bkeske

smelvis said:


> But then I also think you could cut Government in half and actually make them work and we wouldn't have a problem.


Absolutley. The Constitution mandates Congress convene at least once a year.

I think that sounds good to me, unless a vote is necessary for military action/funding, they really don't need more that that. It states that Congress should meet at least the first Monday in December. Heck, lets give them the month of December, then they can leave and provide us a nice Christmas gift. The longer they stay in D.C., the worse things get.

:hippie: ipe:


----------



## ghe-cl

IPCPR reports that it has issued an Action Alert in response to the tax proposal. You can find it here: IPCPR -- Pipes Magazine has also launched an online petition that you can sign here: Stop the Pipe Tobacco Tax | Stop the Pipe Tobacco Tax |


----------



## MarkC

bkeske said:


> Don't mix-up Republican and conservative. The two don't necessarily agree with one another.
> 
> A true conservative IMO supports freedom for its citizens to make choices for themselves. This (smoking rights) is an issue a 'true conservative' should support.


This reminds me of Christians who say "well, they're not _really_ Christians" when speaking about a group that disagrees with their particular sect. Although I agree to a large degree; the morphing from Goldwater (my idea of a real conservative) to Reagan, then Bush has been appalling.

The main problem with liberals today is they aren't. And the main problem with conservatives today is they aren't.


----------



## bkeske

Yes, I agree with you about Goldwater. Libertarian conservatism is basically what I myself have morphed into. My father voted for Goldwater, and I remember him catching a bunch of hell for it.

I am fairly certain Goldwater would see such taxes being discussed here as ludicrous in being beyond federal responsibility and/or power.


----------



## David M

Has anyone done the actual potential math on this and found out what the actual impact would be when buying a 2oz tin?

Last night my local B&M guy tried to come up with some numbers and after he added up the additional costs passed on at each successive stage - from Manufacturer to Distributor to Retailer to End-User - he basically came up with around $22 a 2 oz tin.

Today - $9 per 2oz tin
Tomorrow - $22 per 2oz tin

If this is true and there is any chance that this thing passes, I am not buying pipes for at least 2 months and I am just gonna stock up on baccy.


----------



## Jack Straw

^Well that depends on how the retailer applies the tax. It is against the law for them to tax their markup, but I'm sure many of them will. The tax is also supposed to only apply once to each unit of tobacco that the end user sees, not multiple times over stages. It _should_ be something like an extra 3 or so dollars a tin (which does add up).


----------



## David M

Jack Straw said:


> ^Well that depends on how the retailer applies the tax. It is against the law for them to tax their markup, but I'm sure many of them will. The tax is also supposed to only apply once to each unit of tobacco that the end user sees, not multiple times over stages. It _should_ be something like an extra 3 or so dollars a tin (which does add up).


You basically did a $24/16oz=$1.50 and added another at the retailer stage right?
I really hope your right. I dont want to have to stock up that heavily on tobacco.


----------



## Jack Straw

I hope so too...but I'm still stocking up within reason. Suffice to say, though, that I kind of hope the gf is not home when UPS and USPS come tomorrow.


----------



## David M

Simple solution:
Just show her my package to you and say, "This is what was inside those big boxes baby! Just these 12 baggies, thats all"


----------



## Jack Straw

LOL. It's not gonna work.


----------



## Brinson

The tobacco tax should not be a gross receipt sales tax, and therefore should not be seen at multiple stages of development at all. It should be paid by the producer once, and the retailer would see the tax as the price of the tobacco they import going up, not as a tax they have to manually add to each purchase.


----------



## Brinson

Can't seem to edit after 2 minutes, so here's my addendum:

It should be an excise tax...I think schip requires the wholesalers to pay the tax? I'm not positive about that, though, but the point is its not paid by multiple parties. The tax on a 2oz tin shouldn't be more than 24/8, so about $3.

Its still huge, though. Imagine buying a pound of the "Super Value" tobacco which is $12 for 12 oz...Its going to almost triple the cost of that ba


----------



## phatmax

I added this to the letter:

Enough. No Taxation without Representation.
The only people who WANT these taxes are politicians who live by coming up with new ways to seperate us from the money we earn. More Sin Taxes are coming, we are 12 trillion in debt, while running an ever-increasing deficit. Will a $24 per pound tobacco tax balance that budget? NO. So they will have to take more from all aspects of our lives. The problem with Sin Taxes, is that the SIN is our own INACTION. Stand up for the rights of individuals.


----------



## phatmax

Brinson said:


> Can't seem to edit after 2 minutes, so here's my addendum:
> 
> It should be an excise tax...I think schip requires the wholesalers to pay the tax? I'm not positive about that, though, but the point is its not paid by multiple parties. The tax on a 2oz tin shouldn't be more than 24/8, so about $3.
> 
> Its still huge, though. Imagine buying a pound of the "Super Value" tobacco which is $12 for 12 oz...Its going to almost triple the cost of that ba


Problem is there should be no tax increase at all, in fact, SCHIP needs to die. These taxes do nothing to "help fund medical care" because the higher you tax, the less revenue you get. In addition it creates UNEMPLOYMENT. As few people buy tobacco, fewer people will sell it and fewer with ship it and fewer will make it and fewer will grow it. All those people will then be out of work, and getting TAX MONEY to support them.


----------



## ghe-cl

Just so you'll know, it isn't simply politicians seeking tax increases. Liggett Group, the large cigarette maker, proposed this tax last year for the Senate. They're simply seeking to stifle competition.


----------



## bkeske

phatmax said:


> I added this to the letter:
> 
> Enough. No Taxation without Representation.
> The only people who WANT these taxes are politicians who live by coming up with new ways to seperate us from the money we earn. More Sin Taxes are coming, we are 12 trillion in debt, while running an ever-increasing deficit. Will a $24 per pound tobacco tax balance that budget? NO. So they will have to take more from all aspects of our lives. The problem with Sin Taxes, is that the SIN is our own INACTION. Stand up for the rights of individuals.


Bravo!

ipe:


----------



## phatmax

ghe said:


> Just so you'll know, it isn't simply politicians seeking tax increases. Liggett Group, the large cigarette maker, proposed this tax last year for the Senate. They're simply seeking to stifle competition.


100 to 1 they are in bed with one or more politicians that are probably promising them sole tobbaco manufacturing and sales rights after the dust settles and tobacco becomes regulated like medicinal marijuana.

IF they support this tax.

just like the feds promising hundreds of millions for Landrieu and Nebraska for their support of the Healthcare bill....

and the drug companies supporting the healthcare bill as long as cheap Canadian drugs are kept off the market.

While I agree that Liggett is hurting us, they are not out just to stifle competition, they are out to destroy it and get into bed with the leadership and turn which ever way they are told..... Basically a nationalized tobacco company in all but writing.


----------



## bkeske

ghe said:


> Just so you'll know, it isn't simply politicians seeking tax increases. Liggett Group, the large cigarette maker, proposed this tax last year for the Senate. They're simply seeking to stifle competition.


No, it is the politicians that propose Bills, create law, and lay taxes. Ultimately *they* are responsible. Put the blame where it is due.


----------



## phatmax

bkeske said:


> No, it is the politicians that propose Bills, create law, and lay taxes. Ultimately *they* are responsible. Put the blame where it is due.


For the most part, but i found this about the "man at the helm" of the company....

I get the feeling he is a wolf in sheeps clothing. All the highly educated hippies are now in charge of massive, multi-billion dollar companies and STILL hate capitalism for the common man. (look up the CEO of EXXON who supports CAP AND TRADE and the CEO of GE that also supports CAP AND TRADE)

Not only do these elitist scum treat the common man as a moronic peasant, beholden to them, they CHARGE US FOR DOING IT.

Cigarettes and litigation
Bennett S. LeBow made history in 1996 when under his leadership, Liggett Group broke ranks with the rest of the US tobacco industry, including Philip Morris, Brown and Williamson, RJR Nabisco, Loews and Lorillard, when he announced that Liggett would settle the Medicaid tobacco suits brought by forty state attorneys general. Liggett publicly announced that smoking is addictive and causes cancer and other health ailments, turned over long-secret tobacco industry documents, disclosed its ingredients, and *testified against the industry*. Liggett was the first cigarette company to voluntarily put the label "Nicotine is Addictive" on their product.
LeBow's actions were pivotal to the government in their signing of the Master Settlement Agreement. In addition to this, LeBow was honored by Florida Governor Lawton Chiles for his "invaluable assistance" in helping Florida achieve its historic $11.3 billion settlement with the tobacco industry. LeBow also developed, through Vector Tobacco Inc., the nicotine-free cigarette Quest (cigarette) which is a cigarette designed to help people quit smoking.[1] Also that year LeBow teamed up with corporate raider Carl Icahn to make a bid for RJR Nabisco.


----------



## phatmax

Here is a letter I drafted and am emailing to my local B&M shops. If you B&M has no email CALL THEM or WALK IN and let them know what is happening and BAND TOGETHER.

Hello,

I wanted to take a moment and let you know that there is a bill introduced on January 13, 2010 (HR 4439) proposing a 775% increase in taxes on Pipe Tobacco. As a pipe smoker I am incensed about this and wanted to pass the information on to you. I found a link to an online petition that sends emails and letters to Congress. PLEASE send this out to your email list. http://www.rallycongress.com/stop-the-pipe-tobacco-tax/2826/stop-pipe-tobacco-tax/

As someone who is lucky enough to still have a job and some discretionary spending money, I enjoy purchasing pipe tobacco and pipes as well as all the accessories. With this sort of tax going into place, I doubt I would have the money to support my hobby. I do not want to stop my hobby because of this. I certainly don't want you and your customers, suppliers and friends to suffer yet again from useless and damaging taxes being levied upon us.

Please, take a moment and help stand up for our rights as smokers, consumers and free citizens not to be unfairly taxed.

The real sin of Sin Taxes is the sin of inaction on the part of those being taxed.

Thank you,


----------



## David M

We need to modify our presentation. We have to create interest and empathy to our cause and that has to be done in a strategic way. We have no public relations dept., we 'the smokers' are it in fact and that is what makes our job that much more difficult since we are the ones developing the approach from the trenches so to speak. Leaving us little option to be diplomatic when all we feel like doing is lobbing grenades at the problem.

Just as certain health issues come up with novel ways to create public interest and in turn support and funding, we need to do the same thing.

This is just a simple example. There are 101 different examples so dont focus on the details on which this example chose to come across. We dont need to have sexy women smoking pipes (or we could) but the point is rather that we need to develop a strategic approach to creating a voice for ourselves that elicits sympathy from the general public at large and get them on our side, singing our tune of unfair taxation etc...






With a strategic approach, the word 'smoker' should not be used. Way too many negative connotations associated with it. Everything else has to fall in line along that type of thinking.


----------



## unsafegraphics

I saw that video for the first time a few weeks back. That's one hell of an attention getter. I think my wife was paying closer attention than I was!


----------



## MarkC

phatmax said:


> All the highly educated hippies are now in charge of massive, multi-billion dollar companies and STILL hate capitalism for the common man. (look up the CEO of EXXON who supports CAP AND TRADE and the CEO of GE that also supports CAP AND TRADE)


Um....okay. And Stalin was a libertarian who secretly attempted to discredit communism?


----------



## MarkC

phatmax said:


> These taxes do nothing to "help fund medical care" because the higher you tax, the less revenue you get. In addition it creates UNEMPLOYMENT. As few people buy tobacco, fewer people will sell it and fewer with ship it and fewer will make it and fewer will grow it. All those people will then be out of work, and getting TAX MONEY to support them.


Unfortunately, that's the real goal for a lot of people who support these things. To them, there's no difference between G. L. Pease and the Medellin cartel. They picture your local tobacconist the same way they picture some kid on a corner selling crack.

I honestly think that focusing on the tax as a tax misses the motive here. They don't want to raise more money; they want to wipe out tobacco.


----------



## slyder

signed and sent.......put my own little twist on the ending.


----------



## slyder

hmm my rant on there being another revolutionary war if the govt dont get its shitt straightend out went to 3 of our congressmen.......got a feeling im in a database now. LMAO!!! Oh well.


----------



## One American

Think the FDA will require a perscription to have a smoke? Personally, I've pretty much had it w/ all these sissies....


----------



## phatmax

One American said:


> Think the FDA will require a perscription to have a smoke? Personally, I've pretty much had it w/ all these sissies....


That would not suprise me in the least, ESPECIALLY if government run Healthcare passes. And that would play right into Liggett Group being the only supplier of Medical Tobacco for the US.

And to MarkC, Exxon could end up being the sole supplier for fossil fuels to the US government if Cap and Trade and/or other "climate change" legislation passes. 
If Healthcare passes, GE could get sweetheart deals for all their medical equipment. And their Jet engines are currently the only ones that meet upcoming EPA standards, which plays into the environmental laws.

I work for a construction company. It would be like our owners protesting construction of buildings...but at the same time supporting legislation for "eco friendly construction" that we have the only access to.

Crony BS that hurts the economy in the long run. And stifles real competition and growth. (but lines of the pockets of the elite rulers)


----------



## One American

When I smoke cigs, I blend my own-and the tax on THAT went up...what...2300+%. My long-term plan is to move my family to a small
Greek island whose name can neither be pronounced or spelled. You can come too. Lemme know in advance so's I can de-activate the mines. :spy:
-Geno


----------



## Mr.Lordi

*Re:If you're reading this, you are the resistance.*

The Opposition now has a facebook page. Join and send it to your friends who haven't signed the petition yet.

Pipe Smokers Agasint H.R. 4439 | Facebook

Edit: Its ok to post the above link, right? Don't want to get in trouble.


----------



## slyder

just joined!!!


----------



## HU1844SMOKER

Time for another boston tea party


----------



## slyder

lets not do it in Boston tho............kinda cold.


----------



## nativetexan_1

Maybe this will go the way of the 10,000% tax on ammunition. Lots of pretty far out stuff gets "introduced" in Congress. It only shows how desperate some members are to control people or their action they don't like.


----------



## phatmax

nativetexan_1 said:


> Maybe this will go the way of the 10,000% tax on ammunition. Lots of pretty far out stuff gets "introduced" in Congress. It only shows how desperate some members are to control people or their action they don't like.


This tax will probably get through, as nearly all tobacco taxes and anti-smoking legislation does. This is not really different then the increase in RYO from last year.

With Ammo, that is the big attack now. But instead of federal controls, the antis- are going to attack at the state level, like in California. Our Cali brothers will not be able to order ammo online either this or next year, plus they are doing their level best to ban the use of LEAD in all ammo, even .22 cal. Any lead substitute is heinously expensive, just look at non-lead waterfowl shotshells. Increase the demand 10000% for use in bullets, and while still legal, ammo will be so expensive, no one will be able to afford it.


----------



## Mante

And if your tax gets approved the pollies will probably approve an annual % increase like ours. Australian tobacco tax went up by 5% today because some friggin bean counter suggested an increase in that order, 22 years ago! Inflation rate 3.75%. Tobacco Tax Increase 5%. Go figure!


----------



## phatmax

Tashaz said:


> And if your tax gets approved the pollies will probably approve an annual % increase like ours. Australian tobacco tax went up by 5% today because some friggin bean counter suggested an increase in that order, 22 years ago! Inflation rate 3.75%. Tobacco Tax Increase 5%. Go figure!


Once they get their hands on a source of revenue, they bleed it until it dies.


----------



## MarkC

*Re: If you're reading this, you are the resistance.*



Mr.Lordi said:


> The Opposition now has a facebook page. Join and send it to your friends who haven't signed the petition yet.
> 
> Pipe Smokers Agasint H.R. 4439 | Facebook
> 
> Edit: Its ok to post the above link, right? Don't want to get in trouble.


Thanks for the link!


----------



## Theophilus

So does anybody know when this might go down? In other words, how soon do I need to make an order for pipe tobacco?


----------



## Hermit

Theophilus said:


> So does anybody know when this might go down? In other words, how soon do I need to make an order for pipe tobacco?


Not gonna happen any time soon,
but it *is* coming and so is a ban 
on internet tobacco sales.
*Now* is the time: *buy, buy, buy! *


----------



## commonsenseman

Hermit said:


> .....*Now* is the time: *buy, buy, buy!*


That's what I keep telling my wife :biggrin:


----------



## xl4life

Thought I would pass this on 

July 7, 2010

Dear Darett,

Thank you for contacting me about the Tobacco Tax Parity Act. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue and regret the delay in responding.

As you may know, H.R. 4439, the Tobacco Tax Parity Act of 2010, was introduced in the House of Representatives on January 13 by Representative Steve Cohen. This bill would amend the Internal Revenue Code to make the excise tax on pipe tobacco equal to the tax on roll-your-own tobacco, which is $24.78 per pound. This bill has been referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means, which is the committee responsible for writing tax legislation. Although there is no related bill in the Senate, I will certainly keep your thoughts in mind should one be introduced.

Thank you again for contacting me, and please do not hesitate to do so in the future on this or any other matter of concern to you.

Sincerely,



Al Franken
United States Senator


----------



## BigKev77

I got pretty much the same letter from my congressman here in Arkansas. I mean nearly word for word. It will pass on both sides no problem. They love taxing tobacco.


----------



## Mr.Lordi

xl4life said:


> Thought I would pass this on
> 
> July 7, 2010
> 
> Dear Darett,
> 
> Thank you for contacting me about the Tobacco Tax Parity Act. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue and regret the delay in responding.
> 
> As you may know, H.R. 4439, the Tobacco Tax Parity Act of 2010, was introduced in the House of Representatives on January 13 by Representative Steve Cohen. This bill would amend the Internal Revenue Code to make the excise tax on pipe tobacco equal to the tax on roll-your-own tobacco, which is $24.78 per pound. This bill has been referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means, which is the committee responsible for writing tax legislation. Although there is no related bill in the Senate, I will certainly keep your thoughts in mind should one be introduced.
> 
> Thank you again for contacting me, and please do not hesitate to do so in the future on this or any other matter of concern to you.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Al Franken
> United States Senator


I wonder if during the election he had to keep reminding himself that Hes good enough, smart enough and doggone it, people like him? lol

I never received a letter from either of my senators. Not even a mass produced, sent to everyone one. :/


----------



## xl4life

Mr.Lordi said:


> I wonder if during the election he had to keep reminding himself that Hes good enough, smart enough and doggone it, people like him? lol
> 
> I never received a letter from either of my senators. Not even a mass produced, sent to everyone one. :/


Well I'm sure he could always go back to SNL :third:


----------



## TonyBrooklyn

Alpedhuez55 said:


> I know not everyone posts on the call to action forum, so I am posting a link to my other post here. Congress has introduced the *Tobacco Tax Parity Act of 2010* was introduced on January 13, 2010 and would raise the tax on pipe tobacco 775% from $2.8311 to $24.78 per pound. I knew this was coming when you heard about all the RYO people re-branding their tobacco as pipe tobacco to get around tax.
> 
> You can see the other post here with a link to email your congressmen:
> 
> http://www.cigarforums.net/forums/v...increas-pipe-tobaco-proposed.html#post2791511


They should take some of that tax money and help all the out of work Americans. Instead of lining their pockets.


----------



## Siv

There were some rumbling about this about a year ago on the pipe forums. I just went and bought 5kgs of the stuff I like smoking.

One thing is for sure - there will be a tax increase on tobacco. 1% or 10% or 1000%, it's going to happen. I just see it an an inevitable and thankfully, baccy gets better with age so just buy as much as you can afford. 

You can actually class baccy as an investment. Buy $10,000 today and it'll be worth $100,000 when the tax comes! Of course, liquidating $100k of baccy is going to be a bit of a problem...


----------



## Hermit

Siv said:


> I just went and bought 5kgs of the stuff I like smoking.


You live in Texas. What the Hell is a *kg*?


----------



## Siv

Hermit said:


> You live in Texas. What the Hell is a *kg*?


I'm an immigrant worker... 

Actually, I'm now a resident... damn I should start using bushels and barrels.


----------



## Mante

Siv said:


> I'm an immigrant worker...
> 
> Actually, I'm now a resident... damn I should start using bushels and barrels.


LMAO. Nice.

1 KG = 2.2Lbs. 5KG = Shitloads!


----------



## Tritones

Tashaz said:


> LMAO. Nice.
> 
> 1 KG = 2.2Lbs. 5KG = Shitloads!


You speak pretty good Texan.


----------



## Hermit

Siv said:


> I'm an immigrant worker...
> 
> Actually, I'm now a resident... damn I should start using bushels and barrels.


Just yankin' yer chain, podner.
Welcome to Puff.


----------

